TOWN OF MANCHESTER, VERMONT
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD (DRB) MINUTES
Development Review Board Present: Tim Waker, John Watanabe, Ray Ferrarin, Cathy Stewart, John Kennedy.
Staff Present: Planning & Zoning Director Janet Hurley.
Also Present: Ed Clark, Jim Deyo, Jim Dingley, Gertrude D’Eredita, Travis Wood, Marek Kovac, Paul Carroccio.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Waker called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Hurley initiated recording and read the remote meeting script, which is attached to these minutes and hereby incorporated. Waker took a roll call of board members.
1. Ed Clark Landscape., 6225 & 6229 Main Street, Site plan review for second freestanding sign. Application 2021-03-022
Waker administered the oath to Jim Deyo, Ed Clark, and Gertrude D’Eredita. Jim Dingley indicated that he was present representing the applicants as legal counsel. Deyo described plans to use property for the landscaping business as a conforming use. He plans to construct a garage/barn to the north of the APO boundary. The pandemic having caused construction prices to increase and having resulted in decreased contractor availability, the barn construction has been put off. For now Deyo said he wants to be able to park lawn mowers in the 3-bay garage and park vehicles and trailers in a spot to the north adjacent to the driveway. His lawn crew would pick up the mowers at 7:30 am and return them by 5:00 pm. This storage of lawn mowers would be temporary until the construction can be pursued.
Waker asked Hurley whether this storage can be in Zone A of the APO. Hurley indicated that would be something the DRB must determine based on the written word of the ordinance. Hurley read the contractor’s yard description provided in Table 4.14 of the ordinance. Dingley reiterated that it would be impossible to get a garage up this year due to the tripling of construction prices. He noted that if he were a resident on the site, he would have various vehicles and machinery stored in the garage on the concrete slab. He surmised that the storage of these mowers would not constitute a contractors yard per se. Waker asked whether the garage would be used just to store the equipment, whether any equipment would be stored outside, and if stored outside, would it be outside the APO. Deyo responded that it would just be the mowers in the garage and the trucks and trailers parked outside of the APO.
Hurley explained that a proposed zoning change would eliminate this particular source protection area from the APO under the reasoning that town water service is available to the mobile home park served by the well in question. Waker asked Hurley what state regulations were involved for this source protection area. Hurley deferred to Deyo. Deyo explained that the state looks at the well and parked vehicles and oil tanks in the vicinity. He recalled that there was an oil tank on the adjacent town property. The state looks for pesticides but Deyo said that his business does not use any pesticides. Deyo said the state categorizes the risks to the well source and reported that he has always been found to be fully in compliance on the site.
Hurley suggested the proposed storage is a matter of semantics and that the DRB has to determine whether this temporary arrangement constitutes a contractor’s yard. Deyo reiterated that the contractor’s yard use would be out of the APO, but he does not want to fully implement the use until he can build a structure to contain the equipment. He said he wants to be cognizant of neighbors. He explained the mowing is a summertime operation. Waker asked when screening of the parked vehicles would come into play. Deyo said he is waiting on an engineered plan, and he would like to use the space within reason in the meantime. Waker asked how visible the proposed parking area would be. Deyo suggested that the 45 mph speed limit means that it would be visible to passersby for about 6 seconds. Hurley noted that the parking area was already constructed. Deyo pointed out that the vehicles would be parked there between 5:00 pm and 7:30 am.
There was discussion of the Hunter Park Road access. Deyo reported that Peckham Industries, which owns the Hunter Park Road access has indicated use by the applicant may continue. Dingley noted that the land records show prior owners had a license to use it. Deyo indicated that he made the driveway one-way with the entry south at the Main Street access and the exit north at the Hunter Park Road access. This will help prevent headlights flashing onto neighbor’s property across Main Street.
Waker asked if any exterior lighting was proposed. Deyo responded that there will be no need for it because they will not be working at night. He added when the new building goes up, there may be exterior lighting. Waker asked whether the existing lights were compliant with current standards. Deyo said he did not know and that they are controlled by the residential tenants. Waker noted that the DRB will want to be sure that the applicant has access for the proposed circulation plan.
Watanabe asked how many employees would be accessing the garage and facility. Deyo indicated that there are three employees involved in mowing operations. Watanabe asked how many vehicles are involved in this use. Deyo said that there are three trucks and three trailers. He added there will be no oil changing activity on property. Watanabe asked if there was a drain in the garage. Deyo said if there was, he would cap it. Kennedy asked how much fuel storage there would be at any one time. Deyo said fueling up occurs at Stewarts in the morning. There may be five or ten gallons of mixed fuel for weed whackers stored in the garages. Kennedy asked for confirmation that most equipment would continue to be stored on the old property. Deyo confirmed this would be the case.
Deyo added that he purchased the property to be able to be in better compliance with Manchester zoning regulations, but he would keep things at the new property to a minimum until a fully engineered solution is possible. Stewart asked for clarification of how the property would be used by the three mowing crew workers. Deyo indicated the three employees would walk over from the old site, get the trucks, load the mowers, and then go to gas up. Ferrarin asked whether the state tests the well water at the other site. Deyo explained that the state tests regularly for various potential contaminants including bacterial, and volatile organic compounds. He reported that he has always been found to be in compliance.
Gertrude D’Eredita asserted that the applicants have a history of noncompliance at the other site across from her house and asked whether that site was in compliance. Waker asked Hurley whether the site was in compliance. Hurley responded that the Quonset hut was approved as a permanent structure by the DRB, she recently issued an after the fact permit for a temporary structure for the shed that the applicant had placed on the site, but she has not inspected the property for compliance. D’Eredita indicated that she has no problem with the applicant moving to the other site.
Kennedy motioned to close the hearing. Ferrarin seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0-0.
2. Minutes of the April 7, 2021, Meeting.
Ferrarin motioned to approve the minutes of the March 3, 2021. Kennedy seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0-0.
3. Other Business.
The next meeting of the board is June 2, 2021. Hurley indicated that she expected an application from Red Fox School for that meeting. Ferrarin motioned to go into closed deliberative session. Stewart seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0-0 at 8:31.
_____________________________________ ______________________
For the Development Review Board Date